Allowed

Thankachan.M.Paul v. Corporation Bank

Kerala HC8 Oct 2018WP(C)/31003/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged SARFAESI proceedings and sought instalment payment of overdue loan. Court held it could not compel bank to agree to contractual terms but directed petitioner to pay dues in instalments per Bank's concession to regularise the account.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to pay 50% of accumulated dues in two weeks and the balance in four equal monthly instalments starting from 15.11.2018 to regularise the loan account; Bank to issue NOC upon pa

Thankachan.M.Paul Vs Corporation Bank — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 08TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 16TH ASWINA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 31003 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

THANKACHAN.M.PAUL AGED 52 YEARS S/O PAULOSE, EMMANUEL HOUSE, NEDIYARA P.O, NETTAYAM , ANCHAL, KOLLAM-691306

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.M.S.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

CORPORATION BANK REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER, CHENNAPETTA BRANCH, USHUS NO.IX/506B, FIRST FLOOR, CHENNAPETTA JUNCTION, CHENNAPETTA-691311

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

SRI. PREMACHANDRAN. S. B.

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

W.P.(C). No. 31003 of 2018

¶15

-2-

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent Bank, besides perusing the record.

¶18

The petitioner, a borrower from the respondent Bank, assailed the SARFAESI proceedings, demanding the loan repayment. To have the loan account regularised, the petitioner has to pay Rs.6,21,475/- together with interest and other charges.

¶19

The petitioner's counsel has submitted that the petitioner, despite his best efforts, could not repay the loan because of his financial difficulties. The petitioner thus wants this Court to direct the respondent Bank to receive from the petitioner the outstanding loan amount in instalments.

¶20

Before proceeding any more, I may observe that expansive as the Court's jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India is; it does not, I am afraid, go to the extent of interdicting the contractual terms, especially in a financial transaction involving public money, and compelling the respondent Bank to agree for instalments.

¶21

-3-

¶22

W.P.(C). No. 31003 of 2018

¶23

But the delays and difficulties in coercive process of recovery well known, the Bank's counsel, on instructions, has submitted that the Bank is willing to regularise the loan account, subject to the petitioner paying 50% of the overdue amount in two weeks and the balance amount outstanding in four equal monthly instalments, along with regular instalments.

¶24

So based on the Bank's concession, this Court disposes of

¶25

the writ petition, directing the petitioner to pay 50% of the accumulated dues in two weeks and the balance amount outstanding in four equal monthly instalments, starting from 15.11.2018. The petitioner will, of course, continue to pay the regular instalments. If the petitioner pays the instalments as shown above, the Bank, as agreed, will regularise the petitioner's loan account. On the other hand, if the petitioner fails to pay any single instalment within the stipulated time, the respondent Bank can proceed without recourse to this Court.

¶26

Once the petitioner pays the 50% as undertaken, the respondent Bank will issue NOC to enable the petitioner to have the

¶27

-4-

¶28

W.P.(C). No. 31003 of 2018

¶29

permit renewed with the motor vehicles department.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

JUDGE

das

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶36

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT ISSUED BY RESPONDENT.

¶37

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 20/09/2017 IN M.C.723/17 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE.

¶38

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11/8/2018 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.

Thankachan.M.Paul v. Corporation Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thankachan.M.Paul v. Corporation Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suganan.K.K Vs the Kottayam District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Suganan.K.K Vs the Kottayam District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Thomas P.L. Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Kadeeja Vs Authorised Officer

Shanavaskhan Vs Authorised Officer

Shakey Shahul Hameed Vs Regional Passport Officer